• FauxPseudo @lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    19
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    There are stories that I wish would go away because they are just completely unsubstantiated. This is one of them.

    • TWeaK@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      1 year ago

      The article offers an explanation of the Viking test results, why do you think it’s unsubstantiated?

        • TWeaK@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          You didn’t answer the question.

          It’s interesting how the article you linked presents the conclusion

          microbial life is not ruled out by the new results; but the fact is that the original Labeled Release results make sense with the chemistry of Martian soil as it’s now understood, no microbial life needed.

          Meanwhile the paper it references concludes

          the chlorine component of the chlorobenzene is martian, and the carbon molecule of the chlorobenzene is consistent with a martian origin, though we cannot fully rule out instrument contamination.

          Which would seem to be the same thing but with opposite probability biases. Your link is twisting its source material.

          This claim is actively harmful to science.

          This is hyperbole.